CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
EN/FR
Search
Menu
Research dossier · History & Society

Battle of Mill Springs

Part of the American Civil War

Layered newspapers, civic records and oral-history reels arranged as chronological evidence
History and societyInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionSep 5, 2026
Entity authoritySource title only
Source-derived summary

The Battle of Mill Springs, also known as the Battle of Fishing Creek in the Confederacy, and the Battle of Logan's Cross Roads or Battle of Somerset in the Union, was fought in Wayne and Pulaski counties, near the current unincorporated community of Nancy, Kentucky, on January 19, 1862, as part of the American Civil War. The Union victory concluded an early Confederate offensive campaign in south central Kentucky.

Editorial summary

The public source identifies “Battle of Mill Springs” as part of the American Civil War. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Battle, Mill and Springs.

Editorial reviewA strong contextual entry point for chronology, institutions and public events when official records are distinguished from later interpretation. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1862—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its value is orientation rather than verdict, with Battle, Mill and Springs providing the first useful test.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Battle of Mill Springs”, the useful work is to connect “part of the American Civil War” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.

Evidence profile

The record creator and administrative purpose are central evidence, because official documentation reflects both action and institutional priorities. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 5, 2026. The first chronological checks are 1862.

Critical limits

Later summaries often reconcile disputed chronology or motive more neatly than the contemporary record permits. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Compare institutional narratives with records created by participants and affected communities. Dates and formal titles are useful anchors, but not substitutes for context.

Best used for
  • Event chronology
  • Institutional context
  • Locating named record creators
Verify next

Contemporary correspondence, government or organizational records, oral histories and cited historical scholarship.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Battle of Mill Springs”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Battle of Mill Springs primary sources, Battle of Mill Springs archive and Battle research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Battle of Mill Springs”?
  2. Which voices are present, absent or mediated by the institution?
  3. What chronology connects this entry to wider political or social change?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Battle of Mill Springs” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.